The Issue
There is often debate among fisheries managers
and between them and NGOs about the extent to which
it is necessary or desirable to increase
transparency, i.e. to make publicly available the
fishery management decisions taken as well as the
basis on which key decisions are made, including
the options available and the scientific advice
received. Similarly, questions are raised about the
extent to which it is desirable, or wise, to
increase participation, i. e. the extent to which
fishers -- and in general the main stakeholders -
are involved in the management process.
Fisheries managers are concerned that making
public the reasoning behind the decisions, the
factors considered and the relative weights given
to them would increase challenges to their
decisions and, potentially, their political
liability. They may also fear that greater
participation of a range of stakeholders with
diverging interests may become too time-consuming
and raise transaction costs to unmanageable levels.
Some also worry about the conflict of interest in
closely associating fishers with decisions
regarding resources.
Considering the generally poor performance of
top-down management it could be argued, however,
that the additional costs of greater transparency
and participation could be outweighed by their
beneficial results. Better informing the public may
also generate the political support often needed to
undertake difficult corrective action and may help
make more acceptable to society the risks and costs
involved in fisheries management and recovery.
Encouraging debate exposes areas of discontent
that, if not brought out into the open and dealt
with, almost inevitably generate resistance to
management. Gaining a supportive acceptance, or
legitimacy, for management arrangements results in
greater compliance and thus lower costs of
enforcement, and in a generally more effective
management system.
Possible solutions
Transparency and participation can be improved
in two main ways: (1) wider publication of the
basic information, proceedings and outcomes of the
management process and (2) allowing higher degrees
of involvement of stakeholders in
decision-making.
Publications of management-related information
could take various forms. Making management
information accessible to the public at large
requires a special effort to use non-expert
language, to specify objectives and strategies, to
clarify the options available, their implications,
and the advice given. Systems of sustainability
indicators could be used to summarize the
information into strategic trends.
Participative management arrangements, where
responsibility for resource management and
substantial management functions are shared between
the government and user groups - generally referred
to as community-based management or co-management -
embraces the ideas of greater participation of
stakeholders and transparency. Very broadly
defined, many fisheries management systems now have
some degree of co-management between government and
users. Such arrangements may range from forums for
dialogue but where decisions are still taken by
government, to those in which government has
delegated much of the management responsibility to
user groups. The roles played by the state and its
partners in co-management arrangements depend on
the nature of the management tasks and on the
makeup and abilities of the various interest
groups.
In many fisheries, particularly where there are
a large number of small-scale fishers involved, the
best - and perhaps only - possibility of
implementing an effective management system is by
involving stakeholders in various operational
aspects of management, including enforcement. In
addition, it becomes imperative that the fairness
and the necessity of the management measures are
understood by stakeholders in order to gain
acceptance of the measures and, consequently, an
improved climate for cooperation and compliance.
Usually this also requires that access rights be
clarified, reinforced, and that rules and
mechanisms are established to ensure equitable
distribution of benefits.
Action taken
Research on participative management has
increased substantially during the last decade and
an abundant set of case studies and guidance is
available. In recent years an increasing number of
management authorities have found advantages in
involving stakeholders in the management process,
often taking place in the context of some form of
participative arrangement. Examples of such
developments can be found, inter alia, in the
Philippines (San Miguel Bay), the Netherlands
(flatfish fishery), Mozambique (beach seine
fishery, Inhassoro) and the USA (Fisheries
Management Councils).
The public access to information on resources
and their management is also increasing rapidly, in
part fostered by the progress in information
distribution brought about by the Internet. NGOs
have been very active in distributing information
to raise awareness. FAO is developing innovative
global and more accessible information systems and
networks dedicated to global resource monitoring.
FAO has also developed guidelines for the
establishment of systems of sustainability
indicators. In Iceland, detailed data submitted by
fishers on their fishing activity are rapidly
displayed on the Internet and accessible to the
whole community. In USA and Australia, a
widely-distributed report on the state of the
national fisheries resources is published every
year clearly showing how resources stand in
relation to sustainability criteria. These are but
a few examples of a rapidly growing phenomenon.
Outlook
Society is demanding more effective management
of fisheries and of the ecosystem. As a
consequence, the authorities concerned recognize
the advantages of greater transparency and
increased participation by stakeholders in managing
access to fisheries resources. The new information
technology (Internet, CD-ROMs) will facilitate
distribution and access to information as well as
broader participation of people at large in the
debate. These trends can only facilitate the
development of institutions allowing better
recognition of rights and higher degrees of
decentralization and empowerment.
|
